1887
Volume 6, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2213-1272
  • E-ISSN: 2213-1280
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

This paper explores the Twitter discourse of the Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, regarding security issues and the threat of ‘Islamist terrorism’ as manifested in the latest election campaign (March 2015) and his tweets and statements on (July – August 2014). By focusing on national security and the underlying threat of terrorism against Israel and the West on Twitter, I argue that Netanyahu disseminates his political agenda further and attempts to communicate political decisions on the Gaza conflict in a digital environment.

By synthesizing Aristotle’s dialectic and rhetoric and the Discourse Historical Approach (DHA) to Critical Discourse Studies (CDS), and drawing on the concepts of topos and fallacy, I attempt to understand and explain how the Gaza conflict is communicated on social media by the Israeli Prime Minister. My aim is also to shed light on the validity of social media in political discourse and to examine whether and how social media can play a role in the propagation of political discourse in times of crisis through an argumentative discourse analysis of the tweets posted by the Prime Minister of Israel.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jlac.00003.bou
2018-07-02
2019-10-20
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Amossy, Ruth
    2009 “The New Rhetoric’s Inheritance: Argumentation and Discourse Analysis.” Argumentation23: 313–324.10.1007/s10503‑009‑9154‑y
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-009-9154-y [Google Scholar]
  2. 2002 “How to do things with doxa: Toward an analysis of argumentation in discourse”. Poetics Today23(3): 465–487. doi: 10.1215/03335372‑23‑3‑465
    https://doi.org/10.1215/03335372-23-3-465 [Google Scholar]
  3. Androutsopoulos, Jannis
    2008 “Potentials and Limitations of Discourse-Centred Online Ethnography”. Language @ Internet5(9).
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Arendt, Hannah
    2004The Origins of Totalitarianism. New York: Schocken Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Aristotle
    Aristotle 1992Tοπικά [Topics]. Athens: Kaktos.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Aristotle
    Aristotle 1994Περί των Σοφιστικών Ελέγχων [Sophistical Refutations]. Athens: Kaktos.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Aristotle
    Aristotle 2004Ρητορική [Rhetoric]. Thessaloniki: Zitros.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Balzacq, Thierry
    2005 “The Three Faces of Securitization: Political Agency, Audiences and Context”. European Journal of International Relations11: 487–511.10.1177/1354066105052960
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066105052960 [Google Scholar]
  9. Boukala, Salomi
    2016 “Rethinking Topos in the Discourse Historical Approach: Endoxon Seeking and Argumentation in Greek Media Discourses on ‘Islamist Terrorism’.” Discourse Studies18 (3): 249–268.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Buzan, Barry, and Ole Waever
    (eds) 1998Security: A New Framework for Analysis. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Cottle, Simon
    2011 “Media and the Arab Uprisings of 2011: Research Notes.” Journalism12(5): 647–659.10.1177/1464884911410017
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884911410017 [Google Scholar]
  12. Cottle, Simon, and David Nolan
    2007 “Global Humanitarianism and the Changing Aid Field: Everyone was Dying for Coverage.” Journalism Studies8 (6): 862–878.10.1080/14616700701556104
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14616700701556104 [Google Scholar]
  13. Gramsci, Antonio
    1971Selections from the Prison Notebooks. London: Lawrence and Wishart.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Herring, Susan
    2004 “Computer-Mediated Discourse Analysis: An Approach to Researching Online Behavior”. InDesigning for Virtual Communities in the Service of Learning, edited bySasha Barab, Rob Kling and James Gray. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511805080.016
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511805080.016 [Google Scholar]
  15. Jones, Rodney, Alice Chik, and Christoph A. Hafner
    2015 “Discourse Analysis and Digital Practices.” InDiscourse and Digital Practices: Doing Discourse Analysis in the Digital Age, edited byRodney Jones, Alice Chik and Christoph A. Hafner, 1–18. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Kelsey, Darren, and Lucy Bennett
    2014 “Discipline and Resistance on Social Media: Discourse, Power and Context in the Paul Chambers ‘Twitter Joke Trial’.” Discourse, Context and Media3: 37–45.10.1016/j.dcm.2013.12.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2013.12.001 [Google Scholar]
  17. KhosraviNik, Majid, and Mahrou Zia
    2014 “Persian Nationalism, Identity and Anti-Arab Sentiments in Iranian Facebook Discourses: Critical Discourse Analysis and Social Media Communication.” Journal of Language and Politics13(4):755–780.10.1075/jlp.13.4.08kho
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.13.4.08kho [Google Scholar]
  18. KhosraviNik, Majid, and Johann Unger
    2015 “Critical Discourse Studies and Social Media: Power, Resistance and Critique in Changing Media Ecologies.” InMethods of Critical Discourse Studies (3rd edition), edited byRuth Wodak and Michael Meyer, 206–233. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Kleczewski, David, and Ruth Amossy
    2016 “Pragmatic and Value-based Argumentation in the 2015 Israeli Elections.” Israeli Affairs22 (3–4): 772–787.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. McDonald, Matt
    2008 “Securitization and the Construction of Security.” European Journal of International Relations14: 563.10.1177/1354066108097553
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066108097553 [Google Scholar]
  21. Mor, Yifat, Yiftach Ron, and Ifat Maoz
    2016 “‘Likes’ for Peace: Can Facebook Promote Dialogue in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict?” Media and Communication4(1): 15–26.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Musolff, Andreas
    2006 “Metaphor scenarios in public discourse”. Metaphor and Symbol21(1): 23–38. doi: 10.1207/s15327868ms2101_2
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms2101_2 [Google Scholar]
  23. Page, Ruth
    2012 “The Linguistics of Self-branding and Micro-celebrity in Twitter: The role of Hashtags”. Discourse & Communication6 (2): 181–201.10.1177/1750481312437441
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1750481312437441 [Google Scholar]
  24. Page, Ruth, David Barton, Johann Unger, and Michele Zappavigna
    2014Researching Language and Social Media. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Reisigl, Martin, and Ruth Wodak
    2009 “The Discourse Historical Approach.” InMethods of Critical Discourse Analysis, edited byRuth Wodak and Michael Meyer, 87–121. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. 2001Discourse and Discrimination. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Rubinelli, Sara
    2009Ars Topica: The Classical Technique of Constructing Arguments from Aristotle to Cicero. Berlin: Springer.10.1007/978‑1‑4020‑9549‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9549-8 [Google Scholar]
  28. Schmitt, Carl
    1932The Concepts of the Political. Chicago: UCP.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Schreiber, Scott
    2003Aristotle on False Reasoning: Language and the World in the Sophistical Refutations. New York: SUNY.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Siapera, Eugenia
    2013 “Tweeting #Palestine: Twitter and the Mediation of Palestine.” International Journal of Cultural Studies1–17.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Van Eemeren, Frans, Bart Gerssen, and Bert Meuffels
    2009Fallacies and Judgments of Reasonableness: Empirical Research Concerning the Pragma-Dialectical Discussion Rules. Berlin: Springer.10.1007/978‑90‑481‑2614‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2614-9 [Google Scholar]
  32. Van Eemeren, Frans, and Rob Grootendorst
    1987 “Fallacies in Pragma-dialectical Perspective.” Argumentation1: 283–301.10.1007/BF00136779
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00136779 [Google Scholar]
  33. 1994 “Rationale for a Pragma-dialectical Perspective.” InStudies in Pragma-Dialectics, edited byFrans Van Eemeren and Rob Grootendorst, 11–28. Amsterdam: International Center for the Study of Argumentation.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Waever, Ole
    1995 “Securitization and Desecuritization.” On Security, edited byRonnie D. Lipschutz, 46–86. New York: Columbia University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Williams, Michael
    2003 “Words, Images, Enemies: Securitization and International Politics.” International Studies Quarterly47: 511–531.10.1046/j.0020‑8833.2003.00277.x
    https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0020-8833.2003.00277.x [Google Scholar]
  36. Wodak, Ruth
    2001 “The Discourse Historical Approach.” InMethods of Critical Discourse Analysis, edited byRuth Wodak and Michael Meyer, 63–94. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. 2015The Politics of Fear: What Right-wing Populist Discourses Mean. London: Sage.10.4135/9781446270073
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446270073 [Google Scholar]
  38. Zappavigna, Michele
    2012Discourse of Twitter and Social Media: How we Use Language to Create Affiliation on the Web. New York: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/jlac.00003.bou
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/jlac.00003.bou
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): argumentation , Aristotle , Discourse Historical Approach , fallacy , topos and Twitter discourse
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error